View Single Post
  #15  
Old 12-14-2005, 01:48 AM
TTChamp TTChamp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Job Hunting
Posts: 517
Default Re: The paradox of making money from opponents mistakes

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still stand by my postion that the villian played "mistake free" poker when he bets the flop. He is acting in a manner that shows the most profit based on the information he has at the time. The same is also true when he calls the flop c/r.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The relevant defintion of "mistake" for the analysis of this hand according to the FTOP is playing other than you would have if you could see your opponent's hand. In that sense, betting with AJ in the hand you described is a mistake.

As Sklansky CLEARLY POINTS OUT in TOP, this is an unusual sense of the word "mistake". The villain did not play badly here, because there is no way he could determine your hand. He played well, but he made a mistake from the point of view of the TOP. Just as calling with four of a kind on the river when your opponent has a royal flush is a mistake, though obviously not a bad play in general.

Nowhere in TOP does Sklansky ever suggest it is possible to play mistake-free poker. The goal is simply to make less mistakes than your opponents do.

In keeping with the way Sklansky discusses TOP, your "paradox" is resolved by noting that while the villain made a theoretical mistake from the point of view of people who know what the hole cards are, his play was obviously not a bad one given the information available to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is how I see poker: the best you can do is put your opponent on a range of hands and act in a manner that shows the most profit (or least loss) based on the range you have put him on. This process has both scientific and artistic aspects.

The "art" of poker is being able to put your opponent on a range (including the possiblity that he is bluffing) based on his past actions. This requires experience, observation, and good judgement and is extremely challenging. I would guess that most players at my limit (including me) only superficially understand this aspect of poker.

The "science" of poker is being able to choose the best action based on your opponent's hand range. The science of poker is deterministic and mathematical, but challenging from a calculational point of view. There is always one correct action based on a given hand range.

When a given hand is viewed from the point of view of the fundamental TOP, there is one right play, and it is impossible for two players to both play a hand correctly. For example, in a HU NL game, the sb goes all-in with AA, the BB looks down and has KK. By the fundamental TOP the BB is making a "mistake" by calling.

But this is useless from a practical point of view (I know that is heresy, hopefully I don't get banned). From a practical point of view, the BB puts the SB on a range of hands (e.g. TT-AA, and AQ-AK, and a 5% chance of a bluff) and notes that KK is profitable against this range. Therefor the BB should call. Let's use the words "error free" to describe the BB's play with KK since there seems to be a lot of objection to the words mistake-free.

It is possible for both players to play a hand "error-free". In the context of the FTOP, it is not possible for both players to play "mistake free" poker (save split situations).

I would like to see replies from anyone who disagrees with the last paragraph (including you David!).
Reply With Quote